where would this team be

JustBlues · Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:59 pm

has always been the plan to get the ball to McCluster. Early in the season, it was believed that the best way to get him the ball was through the air. When Snead fell apart against SC, it became obvious that something else needed to be done. Consequently, in the second half McCluster got a lot of carries. Against Vandy, McCluster was given the ball early and Vandy keyed on him. He averaged 1.9 yards per carry. When you are averaging 1.9 yards per carry, you aren't going to get the ball much, especially when other things are working. Against Alabama, he didn't get the ball so much because he was averaging 2.5 yards per carry. We were trying everything and nothing worked. He shredded Arkansas's defense early and often so we kept giving him the ball. He likewise shredded Auburn's defense so he got the ball 35% of our offensive plays. Unfortunately, our defense chose the Auburn game to let down so we didn't get many offensive plays and we gave up some ugly touchdowns. Against Tennessee, he was productive and got the ball on 41% of our offensive plays. You go with what works. Against Vandy and Alabama, it was obvious that McCluster wasn't moving the ball (he attracted a swarm whenever he touched it), so it wasn't handed to him much. Against Vandy, we found something else. Against Alabama, we never found anything that worked. We should have tried him earlier against SC, but other than that, the decisions on using McCluster have been right on.

lewindha · Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:12 pm

JustBlues wrote:has always been the plan to get the ball to McCluster. Early in the season, it was believed that the best way to get him the ball was through the air. When Snead fell apart against SC, it became obvious that something else needed to be done. Consequently, in the second half McCluster got a lot of carries. Against Vandy, McCluster was given the ball early and Vandy keyed on him. He averaged 1.9 yards per carry. When you are averaging 1.9 yards per carry, you aren't going to get the ball much, especially when other things are working. Against Alabama, he didn't get the ball so much because he was averaging 2.5 yards per carry. We were trying everything and nothing worked. He shredded Arkansas's defense early and often so we kept giving him the ball. He likewise shredded Auburn's defense so he got the ball 35% of our offensive plays. Unfortunately, our defense chose the Auburn game to let down so we didn't get many offensive plays and we gave up some ugly touchdowns. Against Tennessee, he was productive and got the ball on 41% of our offensive plays. You go with what works. Against Vandy and Alabama, it was obvious that McCluster wasn't moving the ball (he attracted a swarm whenever he touched it), so it wasn't handed to him much. Against Vandy, we found something else. Against Alabama, we never found anything that worked. We should have tried him earlier against SC, but other than that, the decisions on using McCluster have been right on.

I can agree with this. He has just seemed unstoppable the last few games. Maybe the line has gotten better, or maybe they have learned to block for Dex. I don't know. I don't remember him lining up in the backfield for Bama or SC, though. At least not much.

JustBlues · Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:18 pm

the new line unveiled Saturday did great. I am odd in that I spend most of the game carefully watching the lines. The reason we really started scoring points in the second half is because our oline had worn Tennessee down. Notice that not only did Dex really start shredding them but Bolden had a couple of big runs as well. Tennessee's dline was worn out by the end of that game. Dex is a great talent but a lot of credit for Saturday's performance goes to our front as well.

rktcityrebel · Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:06 pm

I really don't consider 9-1 and 7-3 the same spot.

And, I'm curious, but where is all this 'he could be hurt' stuff coming from? I mean any player could be hurt this late in the season. Like Hardy. So are you saying that we sacrificed wins this season for fear that he might get hurt? We didn't give him the ball that much early on b/c he might get hurt? Cuz if that's the case, then Stanley should've gotten half the snaps this year b/c Snead could've gotten hurt playing all those snaps.

And some of you will say, 'Oh, so you don't care if he gets hurt', and to those folks I say, you're stupid. No I don't want him to get hurt. But this is SEC football and you play to win. You give your best players the ball and Dex is our best player. Florida rode Harvin last year and he's not much bigger than Dex.

You don't not give your best player the ball for fear he might get hurt. Otherwise, the games wouldn't be played so no one gets hurt.
_________________Dexter---170#, Snead--225#.
Dexter--RB/WR, Snead---QB

spudhog · Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:12 pm

manningesk wrote:Had we been using dexter like this earlier in the season. He almost brought us back by himself against south carolina? I think we might be looking at only 1 loss and dex would be front runner for the heisman. Happy and frustrated at the same time.

Don't think OM could beat Bama but, definitely would've beaten USC and Auburn.

lewindha · Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:15 pm

rktcityrebel wrote:
I really don't consider 9-1 and 7-3 the same spot.

And, I'm curious, but where is all this 'he could be hurt' stuff coming from? I mean any player could be hurt this late in the season. Like Hardy. So are you saying that we sacrificed wins this season for fear that he might get hurt? We didn't give him the ball that much early on b/c he might get hurt? Cuz if that's the case, then Stanley should've gotten half the snaps this year b/c Snead could've gotten hurt playing all those snaps.

And some of you will say, 'Oh, so you don't care if he gets hurt', and to those folks I say, you're stupid. No I don't want him to get hurt. But this is SEC football and you play to win. You give your best players the ball and Dex is our best player. Florida rode Harvin last year and he's not much bigger than Dex.

You don't not give your best player the ball for fear he might get hurt. Otherwise, the games wouldn't be played so no one gets hurt.
_________________Dexter---170#, Snead--225#.
Dexter--RB/WR, Snead---QB

Your point? He proved to me last year he could handle it. He's taken a few shots this year and survived. Or maybe b/c he's undersized we shouldn't play him at all? Either play him(and give him the ball) or don't IMO.

You're not gonna convince me we should be babying Dex. He's a big boy and has said, 'give me the ball'. Sure he could get hurt, anybody could get hurt. I know Dex is smaller than most. But we gave him a scholarship, he wants the ball, and he's our best player.

lewindha · Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:19 pm

I'm not making this argument, but it could be made. Some are saying we didn't want to hurt Dex or put too much pressure on an undersized guy. So we didn't utilize him early in the season like we are now. We relied on Snead and he didn't perform like we thought.

Now we're giving Dex the ball and saying 'Save our season, little man'. Sounds like there's a lot of pressure to push too hard. If he pushes too hard, he could get hurt.

I'm just sayin'.

john_avery_fast · Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:54 pm

spudhog wrote:
manningesk wrote:Had we been using dexter like this earlier in the season. He almost brought us back by himself against south carolina? I think we might be looking at only 1 loss and dex would be front runner for the heisman. Happy and frustrated at the same time.
Don't think OM could beat Bama but, definitely would've beaten USC and Auburn.

We did use Dex as the primary weapon against Auburn; he had over 200 yds on 26 touches (22 carries for 186, 4 catches for 17). unfortunately that was the one game that the Defense took a nap.

badmotorfinger · Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:13 pm

Dex played in the same spot last year, near the end of the season, lining up as tailback. It wouldn't surprise me if Nutt had planned to use him in that capacity at mid-point or later in the season this year, wich imo would have been a great strategy, you know, wait til the middle of the season and then use your big guns in ways you haven't. Some of the Arky fans even commented that he didn't use Dex that way all year. He didn't know, like the rest of us, that Jevan would struggle so hard so early.

Whatever the thought process is, I respect CN for continually putting the ball in Jevan's hands with the assuredness he would get back to last year's form.

spudhog · Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:29 pm

badmotorfinger wrote:Dex played in the same spot last year, near the end of the season, lining up as tailback. It wouldn't surprise me if Nutt had planned to use him in that capacity at mid-point or later in the season this year, wich imo would have been a great strategy, you know, wait til the middle of the season and then use your big guns in ways you haven't. Some of the Arky fans even commented that he didn't use Dex that way all year. He didn't know, like the rest of us, that Jevan would struggle so hard so early.

Whatever the thought process is, I respect CN for continually putting the ball in Jevan's hands with the assuredness he would get back to last year's form.

I don't believe that a qb looks great in practice all of the time and then all of a sudden struggles in games. So, hard to believe that no one on the staff didn't see at least some of Snead's struggles come about.

I do believe that Nutt has saved Dex a bit for the 2nd half. During his tenure at ark, he was really good about keeping the rb's loads minimal with the exception of a few games a season. One thing I always liked about his coaching.

And yes, OM needed to develop other weapons throughout the season. It's unfortunate that those other weapons aren't consisten or ready to become mainstay's.

Dex is an amazing player that has absolutely shredded some teams this season. Just so happens the games he's done that in, for the most part, Snead had a good day. I don't think that is by happen stance. IMO.

I still think OM would've lost to Bama with 20 plus Dex touches. But, USC game would've been a whole lot different IMO. But, my parents should've invested in Wal Mart Stock, shoulda got into church earlier and I should not have done that with her. It's all in the past. OM can finish strong and have a good/great season still. They have a wounded tiger team coming to town and hopefully we'll weaken up MSU for you

Both fan bases can atest, season's like this one haven't happened a whole lot the last 20 years. Nice ride from time to time.

badmotorfinger · Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:41 pm

I disagree about the Bama loss. Many of Bama's points came from poor QB decisions by Jevan. Had he plalyed as good as McElroy(mediocre performance but didn't turn the ball over), it would have at least came down to the last drive like it has the past several seasons.

bleuwolfe · Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:47 pm

IMO JS problem this yr is more mental - Heisman hype, high expectations, etc got to him/ he presses too much - also hurt losing Mike 'Long ball to the house' Wallace, and with the OL problems hes started ghost dancing. making Dex the main man takes that pressure away. As we have said many times Dexter is FEARLESS - hype or no hype, he could care less. He lives his life with the same passion with which he plays FB. In other words Dexter is a natural leader. Jevan is learning

hope). I also hope we're recuriting a MW style (Very VERY fast) WR, so far I havent seen it though.

JustBlues · Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:36 am

bleuwolfe wrote:IMO JS problem this yr is more mental - Heisman hype, high expectations, etc got to him/ he presses too much - also hurt losing Mike 'Long ball to the house' Wallace, and with the OL problems hes started ghost dancing. making Dex the main man takes that pressure away. As we have said many times Dexter is FEARLESS - hype or no hype, he could care less. He lives his life with the same passion with which he plays FB. In other words Dexter is a natural leader. Jevan is learning hope). I also hope we're recuriting a MW style (Very VERY fast) WR, so far I havent seen it though.

Mireles, who has Ole Miss as his leading school right now, has been timed at 4.35. Humans don't get much faster than that, and that is before a SEC caliber S&C coach takes him under his wings. He will likely be the fastest player in college football by the time he finishes.

john_avery_fast · Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:52 am

JustBlues wrote:Mireles, who has Ole Miss as his leading school right now, has been timed at 4.35. Humans don't get much faster than that, and that is before a SEC caliber S&C coach takes him under his wings. He will likely be the fastest player in college football by the time he finishes.

According to Scout, he is committed. First I have heard. Tend to rely on Rivals for my recruiting info.

JustBlues · Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:54 am

john_avery_fast wrote:
JustBlues wrote:Mireles, who has Ole Miss as his leading school right now, has been timed at 4.35. Humans don't get much faster than that, and that is before a SEC caliber S&C coach takes him under his wings. He will likely be the fastest player in college football by the time he finishes.
Who is this guy? Can't find him on any prospect list.

Quadarias Mireles, Delray Beach, Florida